Re: Wiki War I

On Friday 26 March 2004 09:54 am, dircha wrote:
> Welcome to the list. I'll give you my comments on some of what you related.
Thanks!

> > backlinks
> > from what I see, wikipedia does not support backlinks, which means that
> > developers must do twice as much work for every update than is neccessary
Backlinks provide two way links between every page.
Somebody deleted the "back links" page on the wiki...  (grrr) where it 
described what back links are.  The closest to being equivalent thing on the 
wikipedia is "what links to here" .  If it were automatically expanded in the 
margin i'd be totally happy.

> >
> > Navigation
> > pages must have links to documents that are logically parents, and peers
> > this type information makes it extremely easy to navigate a site
>
> I'm not sure to what extent I am comfortable with this. Many pages may
> not properly have a single logical parent. Multiple nodes each of which
> do not make sense independently of the others can be combined into a
> single node with a section structure. Attempting to force a single
> logical parent structure unnecessarily constrains the use and

It is completely possible for a document to have multiple parents. I forget to 
add that extra apostrophe to "parents'"
The "back" button method of navigation only provides access to one "parrent" 
or related artilce.

That's why I have the structure:
Member Of: [[broad cat]] : [[ lesser cat]]
Member Of: [[broad cat2]]:[[lesser cat2]] : [[specific case ]]

Writing it down once does not exclude other people from writing down the other 
logical parents. I was hoping it would encourage it.  So, we both see the 
problem, and... I've had a few of my "Member Of" comments be deleted, so I 
was very frustrated... I'm looking for more "Member Of" comments.

It will also be possible to add an extension that will parse out the "member 
of" sections (if we format them consistently)  so that the computer can 
create a table of contents based on whatever topic the user wants.  This goes 
with multiple table of contents.



> flexibility of content. We should so far as is possible always try to
> create content that is independently valuable. 
Linking the pages makes it more usefull in more contexts.  If we have to 
rewrite wiki pages because there are no links between pages... we are 
creating special purpose, unflexible wiki pages.  We must have a navigation 
system to allow the documents to be usefull.

We are not writing a dictionary (although dictionary type entries are 
helpfull)  We are creating a web of knowledge that will help somebody solve a 
problem.  A page that links to related pages immediately gives the reader an 
idea of what the page is about, and helps the person search for more 
information.

Pages with just a few links or scratched down information can be as usefull as 
full blown encyclopedia articles. (often times more so, because they get 
right to the point)


> Also, all modern graphical browsers provide a "Back" button with a drop
> down list of previous links. And any user who is not comfortable with
> this is perfectly able to use a "table of contents" node as a navigation
> window, and a second window as a content window. Most browsers I am
> aware of support drag-and-drop of links from one window into another.

See above.

> > Save Work
> > why put stuff into paragraph format if it's already said better
> > elsewhere?


> But can it be said better here? Value is added to content by the editor
...
> content than can a single person elsewhere. Wiki facilitates the
> elimination of individual bias and the synthesis of multiple informed
> perspectives.



> > why
> > hide a hyperlink with a title.. when it just causes the end user a bit
> > more work when they want to remember the site?  (you are taking away the
> > ability of the user to remember the URL on vis own)  The user is a part
> > of the wiki!
>
> When a link exists in the context of a paragraph, or in cases where the
> link URL itself is not memorable, I generally see no reason not to
> re-title the link to make it flow with the paragraph. This is also
> addressed in ensuring that a project or application title is never
> associated with a link to anything but the official source of
> information for that project or the node that functions as the same in
> the wiki. Miscellaneous non-official links generally, I think, shouldn't
> be included in the first place.

We mostly disagree here.

 we probably disagree on what a memorable hyperlink is... I'm arguing that the 
domain name and a bit of path may not be repeatable by an end user, but it 
will allow them to verify that they have actually gone to the site that they 
wanted to go to.

I don't like retitling a hyperlink inside of a paragraphs even..., well there 
are some times that the case has to be changed... so I definitely believe 
that there are times to do [[chickens|chicken]]...  e.g.  I like to eat 
chicken pot pies...    is way better than I like to eat chickens pot pies...

I do absolutely oppose the "hiding" of hyperlinks in a table of contents/list 
of links, as it causes confusion as to weather the link is onsite or not.  We 
don't need an External Links section!!! that just separates the hyperlink 
from the content!  and makes the page less dense!

I strongly believe that we need to have links to off site resources, at every 
marginally appropriate instance.  It is like citing sources in a school / 
industry research paper.   Our data will also go out of date because we are 
not the authoritive (sp)  figures for these projects that we link to.

also, some knowledgable people won't want to write on a wiki that is moderated 
militieristically, or not agree with your licensing.. and keep really nice up 
to date tutorials up for projects that they care about.   You would be doing 
a disservice by represeting yourselves as the premiere information provider 
for linux solutions.  I think a wiki type content delivery system will become 
the premier solution system, but not if it doesn't have interoperability with 
other sites.

I care about free software. (as in freedom)
I care about linux, but i could go with any other gpled system
i care about wiki's,  but I want features from many..
I care about having correct info.
I care about knowing of possible errors
I care about interoperability


I would be willing to make the wiki navigation structure, but my changes have 
been squashed!

Do you guys want to give me a couple days of relative freedom from navigation 
systems being nuked and take my gift of time and see if you like it?



>
> --dircha
> _______________________________________________
> Lqwiki-list mailing list
> Lqwiki-list-cunTk1MwBs/4hYYZOrhEC/[email protected]
> http://lists.linuxquestions.org/mailman/listinfo/lqwiki-list